Not necessarily conclusive evidence that a permanent

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: annot be detached without substantial injury to the thing itself or to that to which it is attached, this supplies strong but not necessarily conclusive evidence that a permanent fixing was intended … On the other hand, the fact that the fixing is very slight helps to support an inference that it was not intended to be permanent. But each case depends on its own facts. (Reproduced with permission of Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited.) COMMENT: This judgment could be summarised as follows: • Basic presumption—if a chattel is actually attached to land by means other than its own weight, it is prima facie a fixture and the burden of proof is on anyone who says otherwise. • Where the basic presumption is disputed, the court will: – look at the intention of the person who places the thing in position; and then – examine the degree of annexation—that is, the extent to which the thing has become part of whatever it is attached to. In assessing the degree of annexation, the co...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 04/23/2012.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online